Lawmakers reviewing campaign spending rules have spent large sums on tickets, meals, more

After years of resisting requests to clarify what Louisiana politicians can and can't do with campaign money, the Legislature in 2013 tasked a group of lawmakers with proposing stricter campaign expense rules. But that committee put on the job includes politicians who have themselves spent thousands of dollars on tickets, meals and other perks the current law allows - and the group missed its deadline for issuing recommendations.

The 20 members of the joint House and Senate Governmental Affairs Committee collectively shelled out more than $630,000 in campaign cash between 2009 and 2012 for expenses that included golf tournaments, meals, travel expenses and tickets to LSU football games, Essence Music Festival and other events, a review by NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune and WVUE Fox 8 News found.

State law bans using campaign funds for personal expenses, but the state Board of Ethics says it allows expenses "related to a political campaign or the holding of a public office or party position." The board has been asking lawmakers and the Jindal administration to clarify what that means, while some watchdog organizations are pushing lawmakers to restrict expenses on tickets, meals and other similar uses - or at least to require politicians to disclose more details on the expenses, like most private businesses do.

Story by

Manuel TorresNOLA.com |The Times-Picayune

Lee ZurikFox 8 News/Fox8live.com

The money committee members spent in those categories represented 15 percent of the roughly $4 million they paid in all areas during the four years analyzed.

One member alone, House Speaker Chuck Kleckley, R-Lake Charles, spent nearly $20,000 on tickets to sporting events at LSU, McNeese State University and the 2012 BCS football game, the records show. Kleckley did not report in any of those cases who used the tickets or what campaign or official purpose they served.

Kleckley said all his campaign expenses "are related to the campaign and the running of an office." He said the tickets "are given to charities for fundraising raffles or are donated to groups or constituents. All laws were followed in expending those funds."

Referring to the totals spent by all committee members, Kleckley noted the sum involved 20 officials during a period that included an election year and lawmakers paying debts from past elections.

"It would seem that again lumping that many members together who all had differing circumstances surrounding their need for campaign funds is painting with a very broad brush," Kleckley said.

But a representative of a watchdog group advocating for tighter campaign finance rules expressed dismay that many of the legislators assigned to review the law have themselves spent thousands on items that have come under fire. Margie Seeman, vice chairwoman of Citizens for Good Government, said it was also disappointing that the legislative committee missed a Feb. 1 deadline to present recommendations on the appropriate use of campaign money.

"It's discouraging," Seeman said. "It seems unlikely they are going to want to deprive themselves of the ability to use campaign money in this way."

Some members of the committee said the Feb. 1 deadline was not legally binding because it was approved by resolution and not in law. They also said they're still discussing proposals with state Ethics Board members, including possible measures to require officials to disclose who used tickets or who attended meals. They said the group plans to make recommendations and submit bills ahead of the legislative session that begins March 10.

"We're discussing several issues and plan to make recommendations to the full committee and file some legislation," said Sen. Ed Murray, D-New Orleans, a member of the group discussing campaign finance proposals with Ethics Board members. "But I don't have a timeline."

Referring to the committee's missed deadline, UNO professor and political analyst Ed Chervenak said groups pushing for change will have to keep public pressure if they want lawmakers to make changes.

"One way to head off reform is to stall and hope the issue goes away once people are not paying attention," he said.

NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune and WVUE Fox 8 News reviewed the expenses of every committee member during a two-month examination of more than 280,000 records of campaign expenses by all Louisiana politicians. That review is part of a comprehensive examination of Louisiana's campaign financing process that the news organizations launched in the fall.

Reporters decided to break out the expenses of the members of the joint Governmental Affairs Committee, who are likely to play a key role in whether any changes are approved at the upcoming session.

The findings concerning the joint committee include:

A majority of committee members - 13 of the 20 - spent at least $9,200 for events, including college sports, golf tournaments, concerts and other entertainment and recreation. The members spent almost $47,000 paid to LSU alone for things labeled as "tickets."

Twelve of the 20 lawmakers spent at least $8,300 for meals, drinks and other food expenses. Four members spent more than $22,000 each, including Kleckley, Rep. Stephen Pugh, R-Ponchatoula, and Sens. Jack Donahue, R-Mandeville, and J.P. Morrell, D-New Orleans. Some advocates have objected to the frequency of food expenditures by politicians; others have said the lack of detail on who attended and the meal's purpose make it difficult to determine whether expenses are appropriate.

Six members spent at least $8,000 each for vehicle costs, travel and hotels. Kleckley was the indisputable champ in this category, amassing more than $34,000 in travel expenses. Most committee members did not list the purpose of the travel or whether other people were traveling with the politicians - factors some groups have highlighted in criticizing these expenses.

Proposing changes

The vagueness of the law on campaign expenses has prompted the Ethics Board over the past three years to ask lawmakers to clarify uses that are and aren't allowed. Together with the Public Affairs Research Council, the Ethics Board in December urged the joint legislative committee to recommend stricter disclosure of campaign expenses, so the public can better determine how thousands of elected officials spend millions of dollars every year.

PAR also has urged lawmakers to consider adopting federal rules that prohibit the purchase of sports tickets, among other expenses. Lawmakers were also asked to review the use of vehicles.

"You don't want a campaign contribution that's simply a gift in a different package," Robert Travis Scott, president of PAR, told the committee.

Sen. Jody Amedee, R-Gonzales, who chairs the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, said the group is debating proposals that could limit lawmakers' use of campaign contributions to pay for housing when in Baton Rouge, an expense for which they get a taxpayer-funded stipend. He also said he would favor requiring receipts be filed with some expenses.

But getting broad support for some proposals - especially restrictions on some expenses - will require several committee members to give up perks. Sports tickets are an example, as LSU athletics was among the top recipients of campaign cash in the four years the news organizations reviewed. Kleckley topped the list with almost $12,000 for LSU tickets, while Rep. Mike Danahay, D-Sulphur, spent more than $8,100 and Reps. Stephen Pugh and John Berthelot, R-Gonzales, spent more than $5,700 each.

Kleckley also spent almost $8,000 for McNeese tickets, while Rep. John Schroder, R-Covington, spent $6,750 for Tulane tickets in February 2012.

None of these officials' campaign reports indicated who used the tickets. Danahay and Berthelot did not answer a request for comment.

Schroder, in a statement, said: "The $6,750 paid to Tulane Athletics was for a baseball fundraiser for my campaign. The fundraiser consisted of a 'tailgate with the candidate' which included entry to the game and refreshments."

Pugh said he gave away most of his LSU tickets to constituents or to organizations looking to raffle tickets as fundraisers. He said he documented who received the tickets, but didn't name them in his campaign finance reports "because I did not have permission" from recipients.

Asked if he would favor banning or restricting the use of campaign money to buy tickets, or even requiring disclosure of who received them, Pugh demurred.

"I personally do not feel there's any abuse there," he said, adding later: "If people did not agree with how we use campaign money, they would not give it."

Amedee said he is not sure about supporting a ban on sports tickets but he could support requiring more documentation on those expenses.

Better disclosure sought

Chervenak said the vague disclosure in reports is often insufficient to evaluate whether an expense was appropriate.

Sen. J.P. Perry, R-Kaplan, for example, paid $12,984 to the LSU athletic department for "promotion." What did that money go for? Perry did not respond to a message asking the question.

Murray's campaign spent $7,146 in Bayou Classic tickets and catering at a Superdome suite in 2012. His campaign also spent $5,387 for catering during the 2012 Essence Festival, and $2,189 at Martin's Wine Cellar for "Essence Music refreshments." Murray's records didn't say who used the tickets or suite. He did not respond to a request for comment on these specific expenses.

Rep. Jared Brossett, D-New Orleans, spent $3,000 in tickets to the annual Jazz Fest gala, $680 for 2012 Sugar Bowl tickets and $1,710 in two payments to Ticketmaster in late 2011 for "tickets to event," with no other description. He also didn't answer a request for comment.

Advocates of changes in the law have also focused on the meals many lawmakers charge as campaign expenses - most with little or no explanation.

Kleckley spent $2,320 at Muriel's restaurant on May 9, 2012, for an event described as "spouses luncheon." Kleckley didn't report who attended or how the event was related to his campaign or the exercise of his office - the standards for an appropriate expense.

Kleckley also reimbursed himself $2,084 on April 4, 2010, for "fundraiser dinners," without naming locations, dates or attendees.

Morrell charged his campaign account more than $25,000 for 443 meals and food purchases, including 142 described as meals with "staff or constituents." The list included a $1,005 lunch at Landry's, a $960 meal at The Munch Factory and a $794 meal at Dooky Chase's.

Other members of the committee, like many Louisiana politicians, had thousands of dollars in expenses identified only as meetings, meals or gifts for "constituents." Critics, such as Chervenak, said the word has become a catch-all that lets officials justify all sorts of expenses with little public scrutiny.

Morrell also had 45 different charges at Starbucks totaling $300, most described simply as "food" or "beverage." The small amounts suggest purchases for one person.

Morrell said the expenses at The Munch Factory and Landry's were fundraisers for the Senate Democratic Committee and for his 2011 election, respectively. The Dooky Chase's expense paid for catering for the West Bank Minister's Luncheon.

He said those details should have been provided in his campaign report.

"It's apparent to me in looking at this report that items were not disclosed satisfactorily," Morrell said Wednesday.

He said more detailed descriptions are not legally required, "but the public is entitled to more information."

As for the willingness of the join legislative committee to tighten expense rules, Morrell said members "must be available to meet with anyone and everyone regarding their concerns and ideas regarding any kind of reform. The existing system can be improved and nonprofit governmental watchdog organizations are great catalysts for change. . . . I'll reach out to representatives from PAR, and continue to be available to other related groups, regarding their legislative agendas on campaign finance reform."

Pugh charged his campaign for 229 meals and food expenses overall, including 160 different constituent meetings and meals that didn't indicate who attended. Pugh said in a small town, constituents often approach him when he's dining at local restaurants to discuss public matters or seek help in handling a government issue.

Asked if every time a constituent talks to him while out eating he can expense that meal to his campaign fund, Pugh said: "That's how I interpret it, yes."

Chervenak has criticized how many officials justify tapping their campaign accounts simply for providing constituents with the representation the officials sought by running for office.

"Wining and dining constituents, I don't think fits into the description of being a representative," he said.